Recent News

June 15, 2017

Regence Blueshield v. Susan Finn (E.D. Wash. June 15, 2017) – ROS attorneys obtained summary judgment in favor of an ERISA plan after the participant refused to reimburse the plan in accordance with the terms outlined in its SPD. The Participant argued that she had not received a copy of the SPD, rendering the Plan’s reimbursement provision void and unenforceable. The Court rejected the participant’s argument and held that the plan administrator’s attempts to provide participants access to the Plan documents fulfilled ERISA’s disclosure requirements. The Court enforced the terms of the SPD and awarded the Plan full reimbursement of the benefits paid on behalf of the participant.

November 5-8, 2017

On November 5, 2017, ROS attorneys, Lance Oliver and Gordon Howard presented, “How to Navigate the Perfect Subrogation Storm: A Detailed Case Study.” This presentation discussed the facts underlying and lessons learned in a recent federal court case pursued by our office. This case involved many treacherous issues facing subrogation professionals including preferred member issues; dealing with hostile plaintiff’s counsel; critical elements in determining what serves as the governing ERISA plan document; and how a stop-loss carrier can impact reimbursement.

August 29, 2016

CHP v. Willia Ledford, 204 F. Supp. 3d 983 (M.D. Tenn. August 29, 2016) – ROS attorneys successfully obtained reimbursement in this case involving a personal injury accident in New York. The participant refused to reimburse the Plan and asserted that the SPD was not legally binding and her third-party recovery was not subject to the Plan’s reimbursement provision. The Court determined that the SPD was the operative plan document and denied the participant’s motion to dismiss.

October 23-27, 2016

Lance Oliver presented, “Burdensome ERISA Document Requests and How to Respond” at the 2016 National Association of Subrogation Professionals Conference in Colorado Springs, CO.

Featured Article

July 3, 2019

We are excited to announce our recent victory on an important ERISA subrogation case, MBI Energy Services, Inc. v. Hoch, 929 F.3d 506 (8th Cir. 2019). On July 3, 2019, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a Published Opinion affirming the decision of the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota. In this case, attorneys from Russell, Oliver & Stephens filed a lawsuit on behalf of an ERISA plan after the participant refused to reimburse the Plan in accordance with the terms outlined in its SPD. The participant argued that the SPD was not the governing Plan document and that an Administrative Services Contract — which was silent as to reimbursement — was the governing document. The Court of Appeals, however, determined that the SPD was the Plan’s written instrument because it is the only document providing Plan benefits. The Court of Appeals also affirmed the dismissal of the Plan participant’s counterclaims against the Plan.

This is a great win for all of us handling ERISA subrogation. Please feel free to contact us directly to discuss the case. In fact, if you would like to discuss the case with Attorney Gordon Howard, who primarily handled this matter, please feel free to call him at 901-844-4449.